posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:24 AM
My starting point is that most people feel disillusioned with government. They feel that they have no participation within the process of government.
They seem to be disenfranchised and frustrated because of it. A voters contribution over a lifetime, is to put maybe 10 crosses in a box, which quite
frankly, is insulting. The system we have is from a different age. What's needed is a shift in the system to bring the voter/people back into the
political triangle where our voice, pleasure or displeasure can be heard.
At the moment there is no direct feedback from the voters to the Government. When an unpopular and/or unjust decision is made, at the moment a good
politician can spin it, forcing people in debates and speculation. They can probably ride it out over time, wait for people to forget about it or the
press to focus on something else. But ultimately there’s no mechanism to stop and make them think reconsider.
In fact the only feedback back into ‘The Halls of Power’ which we currently have, are ‘The Press’. If they really get their teeth into
something they can hound and push an agenda. Hopefully they’ll push an agenda that they feel will sell newspapers to the people. Sometimes (as
we’ve all seen) they have their own agenda and at worst are overtly partisan. Other than that you're stuck with a politician whose main priority is
to stay in power. At the moment that might be done by pleasing lobbyists, businesses, journalists, or any of a number of people working within that
murky, backroom world of power. It’s not necessarily always pleasing ‘us’, the majority they are supposed to be representing the interests
The other way that our voice can be heard is by protesting. But unless the protests are reported by the media (they have to be large numbers of people
and lengthy in time), there's probably no chance of a government responding and reacting to it. Anyway it's only a minority of the voting public
that are protesting. Students have the time to participate but ordinary people are far too busy getting on with their ‘real lives’ to take part in
anything like that. Plus most of the time it’s the people with the most extreme views who are the ones willing to voice their opinions and protest.
So we can’t always rely on that.
Our election system currently is archaic and was designed nearly a couple of hundred years ago. I don't see how difficult it would be in an
electronic age to setup a system whereby instead of having one vote every 4 to 5 years, you have a ‘Continuous Voting System’. So not just an
electronic/computer voting system, one day every 4 years, just on Election day. It would be continuous, in that you could vote everyday of the year,
So imagine, on ‘Day One’ of a new government, you 'set-up' (online, or via a telephone) your vote. You are a voter for Party A. Say, for example
this happens to be the party in power. Should Party A do something you disagree with you have the opportunity to change your vote, (either on-line or
via telephone) any day of the year, any time of the day or night. This would make Party A instantly aware of how their policies/laws are going to
effect them come election time.
At any time you could recast your vote and as many times as you want. When it comes to election time either you vote again, as we do now. Or your
current vote that is ‘held in the system’ at the stroke of midnight on election night holds as your vote for the General Election. Whether you
changed it 1000 times or not at all since last election-day, 4 years before.
CONCLUSIONS & QUESTIONS
Before anyone says it, the current system is just as open to fraud as this Modern one would be. But I accept that there’s a whole other discussion
there. So forget the details of it. It may be subject to fraud even with ID, or it may not. I’m not so much interested in the operational aspect of
it but is the principal of it. In principal would it work.? Would politicians be more receptive to the wishes of the voters. Or would it cause chaos?
Would Politicians stop making the difficult, yet right decisions, in search for vote grabbing?
I think in the UK and US approx. 60% of those who are eligible, actually vote. So the silent mass of voters that currently do not exercise their vote,
would now be forced to vote. That in-itself might shake up the system.
In a continuous voting system parties not in power could gain a following which over time may grow purely from the fact that people can see that their
vote wouldn't be wasted, come election time. So consider that it might end the 2 party system we seem to be stuck with now.
I think it would engage the public more, make the politicians work harder to give us what we want. It might even give the politicians a useful tool to
get decisions close to the 'will of the people'. It may also take all the money out of the run-up to the Election because you’ve effectively
already voted on what they’ve done or said every day of the year. Or maybe not.
It seems that we are just going to continue voting defective personalities into power unless there are big changes with ‘The System’. The power to
instantly adjust your standing vote would be a powerful tool. We can’t vote on every decision a government has to make but we could have ‘the
Remember the Egyptian Uprising and the role Facebook played? Could Virtual-Protests could be organized amongst like-minded people. Instead of marching
in the streets they could organize themselves and tactically switch their standing vote.
The way the system currently works means that it is not going to get torn down. So we are stuck with it but a small shift using technology might
refresh the system.